the "assault" rifles are bad argument is retarded. something like 140-250 gun deaths per year are involving a rifle. all rifles in general account for 2% of total gun deaths. with what the media calls "assault" weapons, making up i think it was 40 deaths per year.
40 out of 300+ million. "assault" weapons are not the problem. and i believe that number has DROPPED since the assault weapons BAN. this is with people being able to own drum mags, as much ammo, magazines, intimidating looking parts, etc.. that pretty fucking good.
and a number i dont know, is how many of those rifles were legally obtained and owned by the shooter.
you know how many stabbing deaths we have per year? around 1800, with a blunt object? 600, being beaten with hands, strangulation etc..? 950. while these big scary "assault" weapons account for 40.
and who's to say you dont need an AR? its an extremely versatile rifle, good for target, hunting, rodents, very popular platform, everyone carries parts for it, knows how to work on it, its the most popular rifle in the US, maybe the most possible gun. its VERY practical to own one, more so than the majority of guns. and being the most popular rifle in the US, it only accounts for a part of those 40 deaths.
and ill say this again. an assult rifle, as defined by our government, is a compact selective fire, intermediate power cartridge, rife. meaning fully automatic, AND semi auto. its a term military branches came up with to differentiate it from handguns, large caliber rifles, etc.. the term assault WEAPONS came from anti gun individuals and the media adopted it. so now all the people who blindly follow the media think everyone with an assault weapon, (a term anti gun individuals and the media use to describe NON ASSAULT RIFLES) is running around with a fully automatic machine gun just like in the movies.
but when an cop uses an actual, selective fire, assault rifle, to take down a bad guy, the media calls it a "field use rifle" cool huh?
what really bugs me is that, supposedly, the school shooter didnt even use an "assault" weapon, he used 4 pistols. yet the government is trying to use that as an excuse to take away our right to own rifles. they are adopting the medias skewed definition of an assault weapon, and trying to take away those guns. the weapons that account for less than .5% of gun crime, and of that .5% id be willing to be a majority of them are not legally obtained.
the government knows this, they are "addressing" a non existent problem, they know they are. its just an excuse to take away guns, take away more of our rights. and they are using dead kids as a way to pass it. they have a way to make the public emotional about this, and they are taking advantage of it. now, if you support "assault" weapons, you look bad, you dont care about our kids. they arent doing it for the good of our people. if they were, they would be addressing the illegal gun trade thats fueling our huge gang and crime problem that accounts for 80% of gun deaths. thats where the REAL problem is. they are choosing to "address" less that .5% of the "problem" rather than 80% of it. the 80% doesnt even get mentioned.
its pretty ridiculous how manipulated and blind the public is on this issue.